From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752284AbbCZHNX (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Mar 2015 03:13:23 -0400 Received: from mga14.intel.com ([192.55.52.115]:2596 "EHLO mga14.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750881AbbCZHNU (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Mar 2015 03:13:20 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.11,469,1422950400"; d="scan'208";a="685853046" Message-ID: <1427353991.30360.87.camel@sauron.fi.intel.com> Subject: Re: linux-next: unnecessary merge in the ubifs tree From: Artem Bityutskiy Reply-To: dedekind1@gmail.com To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2015 09:13:11 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20150326113217.580fe7e8@canb.auug.org.au> References: <20150326113217.580fe7e8@canb.auug.org.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.10.4 (3.10.4-4.fc20) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2015-03-26 at 11:32 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Artem, > > I noticed merge commit 3527a86b7ae1 ("Merge tag 'v4.0-rc5' into > linux-next"). Just a note that if you had merged the commit that the > tag points to, you would have just had a fast forward instead of a > "real" merge. Merging the tag forces the --no-ff flag on git merge > (and adding --ff does not change that). You could have merged > "v4.0-rc5^0" (I think) or (apparently) pass --ff-only to get the fast > forward. You are right, and thank you for telling about this. I hope Linus won't flame me for this. I'll definitely keep this in mind next time. Artem.